The Accurate Reloading Forums
IMR 4007...Anyone Tried It?
11 January 2008, 05:09
John SIMR 4007...Anyone Tried It?
Just curious to know what results folks are getting with it.
11 January 2008, 09:18
Ol` JoeI`ve played with it some in the 7-08 and so far have been impressed. I`ve got "book" velocities with 139/140 gr bullets and excellent accuracy to date. The powder reminds me of BenchMark and meters very well.
Here are a couple targets with various bullets used shot on different days.
------------------------------------
The trouble with the Internet is that it's replacing masturbation as a leisure activity. ~Patrick Murray
"Why shouldn`t truth be stranger then fiction?
Fiction after all has to make sense." (Samual Clemens)
"Saepe errans, numquam dubitans --Frequently in error, never in doubt".
11 January 2008, 11:51
WestCoasterNice shooting Joe. Will have to give 4007 a go .
11 January 2008, 18:17
tom hollandI'v tried it in a 300WSM,30-06,243,243AI,22-250AI and 6-250. I was too close to hunting season when I tried it in the 300WSM to make a change but gave good goups and velocity was alittle better in that rifle over the load I've been using and it's the powder I'm going to use in the 22-250AI and 6-250. I need alittle more time shooting it in the 243 and 243AI. Well good luck.
VFW
11 January 2008, 19:01
John SNice shooting on those targets! It looks like this might work in several applications I have so I'll have to buy a can and see what happens.
18 January 2008, 02:46
IRISHWe have finally started testing with it in an lRPV 9 twist 22-250. Starting at 34 grains and moving up .5 grain a time to 36.5. The 75 gr. sirrocco ll would not group under 2" at 100 yds. The 75 A-max started crappy but at 36 grains 5 shots under .50 and opened up at 36.5 grains . It seems the sweet spot for this load has been found but the weather is bad again, so we have to wait. The bullet was seated 30 thousanths off on this rifle. No chronographing yet. Still need to test the Hornady HPBT match but I'm leaning toward the A-max already as the BC is higher. Later,IRISH
18 January 2008, 03:53
jeffeossoI'll be testing it on big bores, sooner or later.. i bought a can
jeffe
18 January 2008, 03:59
cummins cowboyI tried some in my 22-250 because they listed a max load of nearly 4k with a 50grn bullet, with the max load I was 400 fps below what the data said I should be, I was pretty disappointed with it, and will stick with RL 15
in times when one needs a rifle, he tends to need it very badly.....PHC
18 January 2008, 15:13
owensbyI have tried it in a 7/08 useing a speer 130 gr bullet and the max load gave me around 200 fps less than book load.
Just loaded up some for 2 different 22/250's to see what it will do with 3 different gr bullets.
18 January 2008, 21:27
Stonecreekquote:
Originally posted by cummins cowboy:
I tried some in my 22-250 because they listed a max load of nearly 4k with a 50grn bullet, with the max load I was 400 fps below what the data said I should be, I was pretty disappointed with it, and will stick with RL 15
quote:
I have tried it in a 7/08 useing a speer 130 gr bullet and the max load gave me around 200 fps less than book load.
What's this "book velocity" crap? You guys should know that every rifle is a "rule unto itself" and results with a given load can vary substaintially between rifles. Just because you have loaded "max" load (by which I assume you mean the heaviest load listed by whatever source you are referencing) doesn't mean that that load is generating "max" pressure (or velocity) in your rifle.
IMR 4007SSC is listed at a relative burning rate of 17.2, as opposed to the slightly slower IMR4350 at 17.5. This is a perhaps a better guideline to how it should be loaded than to rely on data from another gun, the features of whose chamber and bore are unknown relative to your gun's pressure-controlling features.
If you've had good performance in a particular rifle with the IMR-series of powders and a powder with a burning rate between 4320 and 4350 is a good match for your cartridge/bullet combination, then there is every reason to believe that IMR 4007SSC would provide you with the anticipated performance ONCE THE LOAD IS ADJUSTED TO YOUR RIFLE AND BULLET.
19 January 2008, 01:53
owensbyI guess some of us just ant as smart as you are.
And some of us know that a reloading manuel is used as a guide line.
20 January 2008, 22:46
IRISHHer'e some pics of our first chance at trying out this powder.
20 January 2008, 22:48
IRISHMissed the secon picture.
20 January 2008, 22:51
IRISHSorry, can't bring up the second picture?
21 January 2008, 07:58
cummins cowboyquote:
Originally posted by Stonecreek:
quote:
Originally posted by cummins cowboy:
I tried some in my 22-250 because they listed a max load of nearly 4k with a 50grn bullet, with the max load I was 400 fps below what the data said I should be, I was pretty disappointed with it, and will stick with RL 15
quote:
I have tried it in a 7/08 useing a speer 130 gr bullet and the max load gave me around 200 fps less than book load.
What's this "book velocity" crap? You guys should know that every rifle is a "rule unto itself" and results with a given load can vary substaintially between rifles. Just because you have loaded "max" load (by which I assume you mean the heaviest load listed by whatever source you are referencing) doesn't mean that that load is generating "max" pressure (or velocity) in your rifle.
IMR 4007SSC is listed at a relative burning rate of 17.2, as opposed to the slightly slower IMR4350 at 17.5. This is a perhaps a better guideline to how it should be loaded than to rely on data from another gun, the features of whose chamber and bore are unknown relative to your gun's pressure-controlling features.
If you've had good performance in a particular rifle with the IMR-series of powders and a powder with a burning rate between 4320 and 4350 is a good match for your cartridge/bullet combination, then there is every reason to believe that IMR 4007SSC would provide you with the anticipated performance ONCE THE LOAD IS ADJUSTED TO YOUR RIFLE AND BULLET.
stonecreek, I think all of us know that, but 400 fps?? you gotta be kidding me, and it aint cause my barrel is slow, I have no trouble getting near what other published data says with other combos. I could have even lived with 200fps difference but 400 fps, onh uh
in times when one needs a rifle, he tends to need it very badly.....PHC